[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFz=yU7Q87ooyokssaFEGBx8BL+Vzs=4z+OOzvg-K5tfbA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:38:36 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/alternatives: Fix optimize_nops() checking
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:28 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> Make sure we scan all bytes before we decide to optimize the NOPs in
> there.
Can we also add compile-time checking (presumably in objtool, but who
knows) that there are no relocations in the alternative section?
Because that was the other "oops, this really doesn't work with
altinstructions" issue, wasn't it?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists